# Evaluating LLM Alignment on Personality Inference from Real-World Interview Data

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.13244 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.13244/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Human values and AI feedback alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation.
- Builds on 11 of its 39 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [Human values and AI feedback alignment](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/human-values-and-ai-feedback-alignment/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.10084/) (2019)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03442/) (2023)
- [PersonaLLM: Investigating the Ability of Large Language Models to Express Personality Traits](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.02547/) (2023)
- [PANDORA Talks: Personality and Demographics on Reddit](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.04460/) (2020)
- [LLMvsSmall Model? Large Language Model Based Text Augmentation Enhanced Personality Detection Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07581/) (2024)
- [Designing AI-Agents with Personalities: A Psychometric Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.19238/) (2024)
- [Can LLMs Infer Personality from Real World Conversations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.14355/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Stable and Explainable Personality Trait Evaluation in Large Language Models with Internal Activations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.09833/) (2026)
- [From Five Dimensions to Many: Large Language Models as Precise and Interpretable Psychological Profilers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.03235/) (2025)
- [Efficient Safety Alignment of Language Models via Latent Personality Traits](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.07918/) (2026)
- [Beyond Asking: A Pipeline for Personalized Game Generation that Reads Players from Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.16196/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in roles requiring nuanced psychological understanding, such as emotional support agents, counselors, and decision-making assistants. However, their ability to interpret human personality traits, a critical aspect of such applications, remains unexplored, particularly in ecologically valid conversational settings. While prior work has simulated LLM "personas" using discrete Big Five labels on social media data, the alignment of LLMs with continuous, ground-truth personality assessments derived from natural interactions is largely unexamined. To address this gap, we introduce a novel benchmark comprising semi-structured interview transcripts paired with validated continuous Big Five trait scores. Using this dataset, we systematically evaluate LLM performance across three paradigms: (1) zero-shot and chain-of-thought prompting with GPT-4.1 Mini, (2) LoRA-based fine-tuning applied to both RoBERTa and Meta-LLaMA architectures, and (3) regression using static embeddings from pretrained BERT and OpenAI's text-embedding-3-small. Our results reveal that all Pearson correlations between model predictions and ground-truth personality traits remain below 0.26, highlighting the limited alignment of current LLMs with validated psychological constructs. Chain-of-thought prompting offers minimal gains over zero-shot, suggesting that personality inference relies more on latent semantic representation than explicit reasoning. These findings underscore the challenges of aligning LLMs with complex human attributes and motivate future work on trait-specific prompting, context-aware modeling, and alignment-oriented fine-tuning.